CLSE vs. ADME

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

CLSE (Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF) and ADME (Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLSE is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Convergence Investment Partners, while ADME is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the Aptus Behavioral Momentum Index. CLSE is actively managed, while ADME is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CLSE returned 31.74%/yr vs 16.57%/yr for ADME. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CLSE charges 1.52%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for ADME.

Performance

CLSE vs. ADME - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) and Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF (ADME). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLSE achieves a 26.05% return, which is significantly higher than ADME's 8.62% return.

CLSE

• 1D: 0.79%
• 1M: 4.52%
• YTD: 26.05%
• 6M: 25.23%
• 1Y: 51.69%
• 3Y*: 31.74%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ADME

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: -0.16%
• YTD: 8.62%
• 6M: 8.08%
• 1Y: 19.81%
• 3Y*: 16.57%
• 5Y*: 7.80%
• 10Y*: 8.86%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CLSE vs. ADME - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	26.05%	20.44%	35.54%	17.54%	-4.38%
ADME Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF	8.62%	10.28%	22.11%	15.42%	-15.72%

Correlation

The correlation between CLSE and ADME is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 22, 2022	0.69

The correlation between CLSE and ADME has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CLSE vs. ADME — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CLSE

CLSE Risk / Return Rank: 96
CLSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
CLSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Omega Ratio Rank: 94
CLSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CLSE Martin Ratio Rank: 97

ADME

ADME Risk / Return Rank: 57
ADME Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
ADME Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ADME Omega Ratio Rank: 55
ADME Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
ADME Martin Ratio Rank: 63

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CLSE vs. ADME - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) and Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF (ADME). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	CLSE	ADME	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.82	1.87	+1.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.11	2.61	+2.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.67	1.33	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.71	2.66	+8.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	38.98	11.07	+27.91

CLSE vs. ADME - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLSE Sharpe Ratio is 3.82, which is higher than the ADME Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLSE and ADME, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CLSE vs. ADME - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLSE drawdown since its inception was -16.45%, smaller than the maximum ADME drawdown of -27.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLSE and ADME.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLSE	ADME	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.45%	-27.49%	+11.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.85%	-7.49%	+2.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.45%	-15.67%	-0.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-23.43%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-27.49%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.00%	-1.80%	+1.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.57%	-7.89%	+4.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.33%	1.79%	-0.46%

Volatility

CLSE vs. ADME - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) is 4.03%, while Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF (ADME) has a volatility of 4.43%. This indicates that CLSE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ADME based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CLSE	ADME	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.03%	4.43%	-0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.52%	8.57%	+1.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.63%	10.68%	+2.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.91%	12.99%	+0.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.91%	14.45%	-0.54%

CLSE vs. ADME - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLSE has a 1.52% expense ratio, which is higher than ADME's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

CLSE vs. ADME - Dividend Comparison

CLSE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%, more than ADME's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
ADME Aptus Drawdown Managed Equity ETF	0.38%	0.38%	0.47%	0.78%	0.73%	0.26%	0.41%	0.70%	0.86%	0.32%	0.69%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	0.76%	0.95%	0.93%	1.21%	0.85%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLSE and ADME in my portfolio?

CLSE and ADME have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CLSE or ADME?

ADME has higher volatility (4.43%) compared to CLSE (4.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLSE dropped -16.45% vs ADME's -27.49%.

Which ETF is better, CLSE or ADME?

On 3-year performance, CLSE leads with 31.74% vs 16.57% for ADME. On fees, ADME is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, CLSE has been the lower-risk option at 4.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CLSE or ADME?

Over the 3-year period, CLSE has performed better with a 31.74% return vs 16.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CLSE or ADME?

ADME is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.52% for CLSE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CLSE or ADME?

CLSE has the higher dividend yield at 0.76%, compared with 0.38% for ADME.

What is the main difference between CLSE and ADME?

CLSE is categorized as Long-Short, while ADME is Hedge Fund. They also come from different issuers: Convergence Investment Partners and Aptus Capital Advisors. Their fees differ too: 1.52% for CLSE and 0.79% for ADME.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.82 vs 1.87), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.